[BjoernKW]

A few years ago - even after having already started a company - I used to call myself a programmer or software developers.

Nowadays, I usually call myself an entrepreneur because being an entrepreneur in most cases indeed is fundamentally different from being employed, even if you're employed in the very same industry.

I find it easier to liken my 'job' to that of other business owners (including even something entirely different such as pubs) than to that of a software developer working for a Fortune 500 company (and I've been working for those, too).

I do take pride in being an entrepreneur. Does that have something to do with ego? It sure does but it isn't the only aspect.

I'd say though that society as a whole does have issues with the assumed default mode of being an employee. For starters, 9-5 sucks. Why do I have to sit 8+ hours at a desk to prove that I'm actually 'working'. Our whole idea of work organization is still so centred around the concept of personal presence and fixed working hours that it simply doesn't fit any more. Yet most companies still insist on these ideas. So you can't blame anyone for thinking that corporate working environments are ridiculous and not worth pursuing.

[CubicleNinjas]

But there's the catch! For an entrepreneur a 9-5 is a short day. And keep in mind that for billions, a 9-5 would be a miracle.

To think that you are above this time investment, or that you can achieve great success without equally great risk, is to believe that you are entitled to more needlessly. This entitlement (not you, just generally) is a mental disease which guarantees failure. Entrepreneur has this same tone. All pomp, without the blood, sweat, and tears to make it mean something.

[BjoernKW]

I'm not saying that working 8 hours a day necessarily is a problem. If you manage to keep that up having 8 hours of quality working time per day is great.

The problem lies in having a rigorous schedule telling you when and where to work. Another problem is fake work ( http://lifehacker.com/5710930/cut-out-the-fake-work-and-focu... ). In corporate environments there's a widespread tendency of wasting time on useless action just to pretend that there's work going on. Work also tends to fill up the time available for it ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parkinsons_law ).

Activity more often than not is valued higher than efficiency or actually accomplishing something. This is why we see things like prolonged meetings and convoluted specification documents nobody actually reads. You didn't actually accomplish something but hey there's this 200 pages long bullshit specification that proves you've been working, right?

I think is due to our society's perception of what constitutes work. Work is seen as something that has to be hard, long and cumbersome or in other words: "If it doesn't suck it can't be work." People like the notorious Tim Ferriss who seemingly manage to get through work and live much more easily generally are regarded with suspicion.

So, while I think that the 4 hour work week maybe is a little extreme and certainly isn't applicable for everyone it shows the right direction. Work and work organization has to adapt in order to produce meaningful results, not just unhappy, stressed out workers.